At 11/9/2011 2:18:32 PM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:Carrying on from another topic. Should we have coliseums?

I think yes, because if the public want it (and they do), then it should be allowed, as long as everyone consents.

I've actually been thinking about this. I think Italy should totally renovate THE Colliseum and use it for sporting and other events. Think about how that would boost tourism, getting to watch a soccer game in THE Colliseum.

At 11/9/2011 2:44:43 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:Absolutely. Though, I think military men should only be allowed if it's fight-to-the-death. Combat sport fighters aren't necessarily prepared nor want to fight to the death.

Though it would be cool to have Coliseum fights between different types of warriors just like the show Deadliest Warrior.

Put modern day Knights vs. modern day Samarais, or modern day Ninjas vs Israeli Krav Maga commandos.

Except not the result of a sh!tty programmers version of match-fight-techniques-and-see-who-wins.

At 11/9/2011 2:44:43 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:Absolutely. Though, I think military men should only be allowed if it's fight-to-the-death. Combat sport fighters aren't necessarily prepared nor want to fight to the death.

Though it would be cool to have Coliseum fights between different types of warriors just like the show Deadliest Warrior.

Put modern day Knights vs. modern day Samarais, or modern day Ninjas vs Israeli Krav Maga commandos.

Actually in more civilized times thousands of years ago... armies would let a champion or a band of the select few decide the outcome of a battle rather than wreck an entire army in a pitched battle.That could be awesome if say, you could get 100 palastinians and 100 Israelis to finally settle the score in a cagematch to the death.

Otherwise, you can get nations that are at war but would not consent to concessions from cagematch outcomes, and recruit soldiers to participate on an individual basis that would give their families one million dollars if they died, 250K if they live. Great profitable entertainment and a good outcome for families who have soldiers in the field that otherwise would never get compensated.

At 11/9/2011 2:54:11 PM, Greyparrot wrote:Otherwise, you can get nations that are at war but would not consent to concessions from cagematch outcomes, and recruit soldiers to participate on an individual basis that would give their families one million dollars if they died, 250K if they live. Great profitable entertainment and a good outcome for families who have soldiers in the field that otherwise would never get compensated.

Now if someone could just convince Al Qaeda to send in a few ringers...

Fvck yes, and I really do not see why we wouldn't if these people are consenting.

To the death isn't completely necessary. If you just chopped this dude's d!ck off, and he is completely incapacitated, I'd say that counts as a fair win.

Official "High Priest of Secular Affairs and Transient Distributor of Sonic Apple Seeds relating to the Reptilian Division of Paperwork Immoliation" of The FREEDO Bureaucracy, a DDO branch of the Erisian Front, a subdivision of the Discordian Back, a Limb of the Illuminatian Cosmic Utensil Corp

At 11/9/2011 2:54:11 PM, Greyparrot wrote:Otherwise, you can get nations that are at war but would not consent to concessions from cagematch outcomes, and recruit soldiers to participate on an individual basis that would give their families one million dollars if they died, 250K if they live. Great profitable entertainment and a good outcome for families who have soldiers in the field that otherwise would never get compensated.

Now if someone could just convince Al Qaeda to send in a few ringers...

F*** No! It would be a tie every time.

"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle